I did not make any % adjustments, but I did change my gearing #'s to 15-43. What's weird is that its not just that the speedometer isn't calibrated. The speed sticks at 152 even though the RPM is still rising. I'm stumped.

Where are you getting that? Absolutely not, I would recommend the opposite: TPS vs RPM selection. The only thing I explained is that either selection can be made. For instance, if I was to run a supercharger or turbocharger I probably would use the MAP vs RPM only option.

I did not make any % adjustments, but I did change my gearing #'s to 15-43. What's weird is that its not just that the speedometer isn't calibrated. The speed sticks at 152 even though the RPM is still rising. I'm stumped.

Yea....Do you run a GPS logger by any chance? I wonder if there is a bug in the sprocket speedo adjustment code. I have made a % change on mine, but have only gone 140's with the GPS logger running, so it works at that speed anyway....

Quote:

Originally Posted by SySt

Where are you getting that? Absolutely not, I would recommend the opposite: TPS vs RPM selection. The only thing I explained is that either selection can be made. For instance, if I was to run a supercharger or turbocharger I probably would use the MAP vs RPM only option.

What is wrong with the PCV import function that is currently implemented? Ultimately, all a standard PCV map is doing is scaling the base fuel map in the ECU. What exactly is leading you to believe that is not what is happening?

Well, Marider used a PCV w/autotune and dyno'ed the bike, then zeroed the PCV and loaded the same map onto his ECU, dyno'ed again and the results were less than optimal. It seems that if it were working well, we'd all just use a good auto tune or custom PCV map made for a bike with similar mods.

R1evo
Please list any other anomalies that you think you found with the software.

Good catch with the proportion percentage bug. Did you find other bugs? I didn't see that myself. Guess that's why we're here. I agree 91+ maps.

When you get the data logger setup up and running I (we) would love to see the AFR readings for the closed loop area. Question regarding the O2 sensors.
Reading I've done shows latency and reversionary problems with the wide band O2 sensors at low rpm/throttle settings. How do you plan on tuning the closed loop area or is this the reason for all the testing.
How are you determining what is too much timing?

Well, Marider used a PCV w/autotune and dyno'ed the bike, then zeroed the PCV and loaded the same map onto his ECU, dyno'ed again and the results were less than optimal. It seems that if it were working well, we'd all just use a good auto tune or custom PCV map made for a bike with similar mods.

So they were less than optimal, but were they similar? Also, care must be taken when using a PCV map in Flashtune. You must ensure that when the PCV map was created the opened and closed throttle voltage settings in the PCV were right. If that is not set right then when the map is loaded into Flashtune, the fuel map will be off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tad158

I think that the map in the ECU was not simply the stock fuel map for that case...Also they have updated that part of the code...

What do you mean they have updated that part of the code? What changes were made?

Well, Marider used a PCV w/autotune and dyno'ed the bike, then zeroed the PCV and loaded the same map onto his ECU, dyno'ed again and the results were less than optimal. It seems that if it were working well, we'd all just use a good auto tune or custom PCV map made for a bike with similar mods.

I've been thinking about this "import" issue and its not nessarly a FT problem or a bug, it could simply be the PCV was not correctly calibrated for throttle postion. Meaning the AT/PCV maps x y axis scaling is not caliberated 100% correctly to the maps in the ECU causing the differences seen in the dyno results.

R1evo
Please list any other anomalies that you think you found with the software.

Good catch with the proportion percentage bug. Did you find other bugs? I didn't see that myself. Guess that's why we're here. I agree 91+ maps.

When you get the data logger setup up and running I (we) would love to see the AFR readings for the closed loop area. Question regarding the O2 sensors.
Reading I've done shows latency and reversionary problems with the wide band O2 sensors at low rpm/throttle settings. How do you plan on tuning the closed loop area or is this the reason for all the testing.
How are you determining what is too much timing?

yes.. the 91+ map as a base is a bad idea. and most of them that everyone is running is based on that map.

one major thing that i have said before is that when you adjust a value in value mode to doesnt change the percentage. if it does its not much or way off. timing fuel YCC proportioning all of them in one way or another. There a a lot of - percentages. which means there below stock. so if this map was supposed to be better then why would they make throttle less then stock. and the sad thing is that these maps are still being used to make new maps, And still offered as a flash and go for us all to use.

__________________
Two Bro's Slip on with y pipe. Flash tune on 91 crap gas. smoke screen, cant wait to do more

Good information Syst and Mach.81, I didn't know that. Sounds like it could be the issue.

For best results, go to the diag mode and energize the EFI circuit to power up the PCV properly. Now set the min and max TPS voltages while in the diag mode. If you don't energize the EFI circuit it will not work. To energize the EFI circuit you can jump 12v+ into one of the injector connectors or the fuel pump connector. Be careful and consult the wiring diagram if you're in doubt.

If you set the min TPS voltage with the engine at idle, you will offset the map once it's loaded into Flashtune because on the ECU fuel maps 0% TPS is with a closed throttle, not a slightly open throttle such as during engine idle.

yes.. the 91+ map as a base is a bad idea. and most of them that everyone is running is based on that map.

one major thing that i have said before is that when you adjust a value in value mode to doesnt change the percentage. if it does its not much or way off. timing fuel YCC proportioning all of them in one way or another.

So youre saying: when making value changes in fuel/ignition maps the percentages applied are off or incorrect. How are you determining whats the correct percentages for the changes? Stock values math applied?